Press freedom and public outrage

Timothy Garton Ash still can't see it (We must be free and able to defend private lives against tabloid tyranny, 24 November). Free speech is not a value that stands above most others. It is a bullies' charter. Free speech means that those who can shout the loudest and longest – the wealthy, powerful and privileged – will get their way at the expense of the rest of us. Fair, honest, respectful speech – those are values. "Freedom" as nothing but a bare slogan is not.Rev Dr David HeywoodCuddesdon, Oxfordshire

• It may be helpful to define the term "newspaper" and separate its intent and purpose from magazine, tabloid, comic and other epithets that could apply to printed material in pamphlet form. Objective criteria separate "newspapers" from "tabloids". Once such criteria are defined in law, newspapers could be separated in shops from other printed material with tabloids ending up somewhere near, if not on, the top shelf. If they want to join the world of the more accessible newspaper they will need to meet the criteria.Robert GanleyManchester

• Timothy Garton Ash called for "self-regulation of the press with teeth". The 2003 version of the PCC Code of Practice said: "Newspapers and periodicals shall take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted material." The 2011 version said: "The press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures." No confusion there, then.

A predicted 2012 version of the PCC code of practice: "The press must take care, but not too much, not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures."Neil HolmesBromsgrove, Worcestershire

• I am bemused by the fact that lawyers working for the News of the World were aware of possible illegal activities on its behalf but have not been required to inform the police.

The police themselves have been aware, for some time possibly – certainly recently – of such possible illegal activities but seem to have taken no action. I refer to the reports on the payments to Gordon Taylor et al which resulted in information about possible illegal activities being kept out of public knowledge. Since this has now become public knowledge, why has no action been taken ?Joe BirkinChesterfield

• Shouldn't we, the avid consumers of intrusive and salacious stories, also be in Leveson's dock? Shouldn't the reading public be asked to explain why it is only now that it professes to be outraged? The reality is, if the same stories had been obtained using lawful methods, we would not have Leveson and his inquiry because it's not the content we object to – it is the way it is obtained. Happily for the press, the market for intrusive stories will be there, long after Leveson's inquiry is over.Nick MasonHarrogate

• Surely the Leveson inquiry would improve its credibility if witnesses were encouraged to name the individual reporters who are currently hidden behind the shield of their newspaper employers. Every other individual seems to get named but not the reporters.Saul GreshamNeath, West Glamorgan

• I am appalled at the evidence I've seen and read in the coverage of the Leveson inquiry, especially the treatment of the McCanns and the utter lack of regard for human suffering, dignity or indeed privacy. But I wonder if these journalists simply were the boys at the back of the class? Those who can do, those who can't become (tabloid) journalists?Joyce MasséHemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire

• Lots of "public outrage" at these tactics, evidently. Strange that 6 million of them spend £3m every week on these disgusting rags.Roy ArnoldTenterden, Kent